|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
7 July 2010 : Column 275Wcontinued
Andrew George: To ask the Secretary of State for Education what the per pupil funding was for (a) primary and (b) secondary pupils in England in each of the last five years. 
Mr Gibb: Since 2006-07, the Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) has been the main source of school funding. As the DSG is distributed through a single guaranteed unit of funding per pupil and is distributed from central Government to local government, a primary/secondary split on a central to local government basis is not available.
Average per pupil unit of funding figures for 2005-06 to 2009-10 for England are provided in the table. The figures are for all funded pupils aged three to 19 and are in real terms:
|Revenue funding per pupil|
1. This covers funding through the Dedicated Schools Grant, School Standards Grant, School Standards Grant (Personalisation) and Standards Fund as well as funding from the Learning and Skills Council; it excludes grants which are not allocated at LA level.
2. Price Base: real term figures using 31 March 2010 GDP Deflators at 2008-09 prices.
3. These figures are for all funded pupils aged three to 19.
4. Rounding: per pupil figures are rounded to the nearest £10.
Helen Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Education whether free schools would be required to give priority in admissions to (a) children with special educational needs and (b) looked-after children under his proposals for such schools. 
Mr Gibb [holding answer 28 June 2010]: Free schools will be bound by the same school admissions code that governs all publicly funded schools. This requires that the highest priority for admission is given to looked-after children. They are also required by the code to ensure their arrangements do not 'unfairly disadvantage a child with a disability or special educational needs'.
Local authorities will also be able name free schools in statements of special educational needs (SEN), in the same way as they are currently able to do for academies.
Helen Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Education whether a free school would be required to admit a pupil with a statement of special educational needs if the school is named in such a statement under his proposals for such schools. 
Mr Gibb [holding answer 28 June 2010 ]: A free school will be required to admit a pupil with a statement of special educational needs if the school is named in a statement. Free schools, like academies, are bound by the same school admissions code that governs all publicly funded schools.
Stephen Williams: To ask the Secretary of State for Education what proportion of 16 to 19 year-olds in (a) full-time education and (b) unwaged training are eligible for (i) free and (ii) subsidised transport between their home and their place of education. 
Mr Gibb: The information requested is not available centrally as it is for local authorities and Passenger Transport Executives to determine locally what arrangements and support might be made available to young people in their area.
Stephen Williams: To ask the Secretary of State for Education which local authorities have no secondary schools with sixth forms. 
Mr Gibb: Local authorities which have no secondary schools with sixth forms are as follows:
City of London
Isles of Scilly
Richmond Upon Thames
Chris Skidmore: To ask the Secretary of State for Education how many applications for statements on special educational need have been made in each local authority area in each year since 1997. 
Sarah Teather: Parents and schools can ask local authorities to carry out statutory assessments of children's special educational needs (SEN) with a view to the children being given statements. Information on these requests is not collected centrally. Information on the number of children whose assessments resulted in statements each year is published in Tables 2 and 3A of the Statistical First Release "Special Educational Needs in England: January 2010". This can be accessed at:
Angela Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Education whether he plans to allocate funding for children with additional educational needs to schools from 2010-11. 
Mr Gibb: School funding for 2010-11 was the final year of a three year settlement agreed under the previous Government, and we have already stated we will not make changes to allocations that have already been made for 2010-11. Beyond 2010-11, this Government are committed to changes to the funding system through the introduction of a pupil premium for disadvantaged children. We will bring forward our proposals in due course.
Miss McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs which regulations affecting farming she has abolished since her appointment. 
Mr Paice: I have not abolished any regulations relating to farming since I came to office. However, the Government are committed to bear down on the costs and number of regulations and I intend to review all planned and existing regulations. As part of that commitment the Task Force on Farming Regulations, to be chaired by Richard Macdonald, is being formed to identify ways to reduce the regulatory burden through a review of relevant regulations and their implementation. It will advise on how to achieve a risk-based system of regulation in the future and is due to produce its initial views in early 2011.
All new regulations, including those affecting farming, will also be challenged by a new Reducing Regulation Committee.
Mr Timpson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what plans she has to reduce the administrative burden placed upon farmers by regulations on nitrate vulnerable zones. 
Mr Paice: The Nitrates Directive requires each member state to review its Nitrate Vulnerable Zone (NVZ) designation and Nitrates Action Programme every four years.
DEFRA will be working closely with the farming industry, other interested parties and the European Commission over the next two years to consider the ways in which the Nitrates Action Programme could be amended, with a view to implementing any changes from January 2013.
In addition, the Task Force on Farming Regulations, to be chaired by Richard Macdonald, is being formed to identify ways to reduce regulatory burden through a review of relevant regulations and their implementation. It will advise on how to achieve a risk-based system of regulation in the future and produce its initial views in early 2011.
Tim Farron: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many individuals have been paid £200,000 or more under the single payment scheme in 2009; and how much was paid to each such recipient under that scheme. 
Mr Paice [holding answer 30 June 2010]: The overall Single Payment Scheme (SPS) payments made to individuals who received £200,000 or more in 2009 and total amounts are reflected in the following table. The details for each recipient will be placed in the House Library.
|Individuals||Total amount paid (£)|
This reflects the 2009 claim payments made to date. Payments made to individuals in Euro have been converted to Sterling at 0.9093, the SPS 2009 scheme rate. The Rural Payments Agency continues to work on a small number of applications that are not yet validated for full payment.
Tim Farron: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what administration costs were incurred in respect of processing claims made under the single payment scheme in each of the last five years. 
Mr Paice [holding answer 30 June 2010]: The Rural Payments Agency uses a new model developed by PricewaterhouseCoopers for calculating administration costs in respect of processing claims made under the single payments scheme. The earliest available data using this model is from the year 2007-08.
The 2005-06 and 2006-07 costs were calculated using previous methodology, and as such the costs for each of the last five years are not directly comparable.
|(1 )The DEFRA review of RPA conducted by David Hunter reported in March 2007 an average of £750 per claim processed for the 2005 scheme.|
(2) Provisional until 2009-10 accounts are audited
Gordon Banks: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what recent assessment she has made of the effect of neo-nicotinoids on bees. 
Mr Paice [holding answer 5 July 2010]: The UK pesticides regulatory body (the Health and Safety Executive's Chemicals Regulation Directorate (CRD)) has liaised with other EU regulatory authorities that have imposed restrictions on the use of these pesticides. It also reviews developments on how risks to bee health from the use of pesticides are assessed and monitored. CRD scientists attended the 10th International Symposium of the International Commission for Plant-Bee Relationships (ICPBR) on Hazards of Pesticides to Bees, in October 2008; no new scientific evidence was presented at this meeting, or more recently, to suggest a need for action on current UK pesticide authorisations.
CRD would act on any substantive evidence should incidents occur in the UK and will continue to monitor research and developments in other EU member states and elsewhere to see if they are relevant to the UK.
Zac Goldsmith: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what position the EU plans to take at the Meeting of the Parties to the Caragena Protocol on Biosafety in October 2010. 
Mr Paice: A set of conclusions were adopted by the Environment Council on 11 June to confirm the EU's overall priorities for the Cartagena Protocol meeting in October. The conclusions are published on the Council website at:
Andrew George: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs with reference to page 18 of the Coalition Agreement, what estimate she has made of the cost of conducting the science-led policy of badger control measures in areas with high and persistent levels of bovine tuberculosis. 
Mr Paice: The coalition has committed that, as part of a package of measures, we will introduce a carefully managed and science-led policy of badger control in areas with high and persistent levels of bovine TB.
We need to consider all the issues carefully, including the scientific evidence, to work out the detail of the package to ensure we get it right. We will be looking at vaccine and culling options as part of that package.
We will set out our proposals in due course, including the estimated costs.
Mr Chope: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (1) what percentage of bovine tuberculosis tests produced false positive results in (a) each of the last 10 years and (b) the latest period for which figures are available; 
(2) what steps her Department has taken to implement the recommendation made in the 2006 report on the review of tuberculosis testing procedures that tuberculosis testing audit and assurance procedures should be enhanced; 
(3) what percentage of cattle slaughtered following positive bovine tuberculosis tests are found to be free of tuberculosis when tested after slaughter; 
(4) how many cattle herds were tested for bovine tuberculosis in the last 12 months for which figures are available; and in what percentage of those herds at least one cow tested positive. 
Mr Paice [holding answer 5 July 2010]: An effective TB testing audit process has already been drawn up and used to audit Animal Health staff engaged in TB testing. Consideration is currently being given as to how best to extend the audit process to all TB testers on an ongoing basis.
The tuberculin skin test has a specificity of 99.9%, which means that when applied to cattle without TB in Great Britain, there is a one in 1,000 chance that a non-infected animal will be wrongly classified as a reactor. The probability of false positives is therefore 0.1%.
A failure to detect lesions of TB through post-mortem inspections or to culture M.bovis (the causative organism of the disease) in the laboratory does not imply that a test reactor was not infected with bovine TB. In the early stages of the disease it is not always possible to observe lesions during post-mortem examination and, due to the fastidious nature of this organism it is very difficult to isolate it from tissue samples without lesions.
The primary purpose of post mortem inspections and culture is not to establish the presence or absence of disease, but rather to identify the severity and strain of infection. It is therefore not possible to say what percentage of cattle slaughtered following positive bovine tuberculosis tests are found to be free of tuberculosis when tested after slaughter.
During the last 12 months 42,262 cattle herds that were not under movement restrictions were tested for bovine Tuberculosis in England. Of these herds 7.9% had at least one animal test positive.
Data from Vetnet is produced three months in arrears and the latest report available is for March 2010. Therefore data cannot be provided for the last three months.
Data from Vetnet is provisional and subject to change as more data becomes available.
Vetnet-Animal Health Database
Hilary Benn: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many lay vaccinators the Food and Environment Research Agency has trained for the Badger Vaccine Deployment Project. 
Mr Paice: The Food and Environment Research Agency has not yet trained lay vaccinators as part of the Badger Vaccine Deployment Project. Training is due to commence this summer.
Hilary Benn: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what budget and how many staff the Food and Environment Research Agency (a) had in 2009-10 and (b) has for (i) 2010-11 and (ii) 2011-12 to train lay vaccinators for the Badger Vaccine Deployment Project. 
Mr Paice: No training for lay vaccinators was carried out in 2009-10.
Training will draw on a pool of 15 Food and Environment Research Agency (Fera) staff, all of whom will be accredited as trainers. All of these staff will also be working on a range of other Fera projects.
Practical training of lay vaccinators will take place alongside the trapping and vaccinating of badgers in the Stroud area. The total budget for this work in 2010-11 is£614,000 and in 2011-12 is £418,000.
Pete Wishart: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how much her Department has spent on official photographs of Ministers since the formation of the present administration. 
Richard Benyon: The Department has spent £176.25 on official photographs of the new ministerial team since their appointment on 11 May 2010.
John Mann: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will take steps to relocate officials working in her Department from central London to Bassetlaw. 
Richard Benyon: We have no specific relocation plans within the Department although we are always looking to maximise the most efficient use of our estate. We will bear Bassetlaw in mind in any such decisions.
Angie Bray: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what steps her Department plans to take to promote responsible dog ownership; and if she will make a statement. 
Mr Paice: On 1 June a wide ranging public consultation on changes to the dangerous dog laws and the promotion of responsible dog ownership closed. Options presented in the consultation included the introduction of dog control notices and compulsory microchipping, among others. The consultation received 4,250 responses, which will need to be analysed before any action relating to dangerous dog legislation is considered.
Ian Paisley: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs pursuant to the answer to Question 978, what the outcome was of the discussions with (a) the UK Permanent Representative and (b) the European Commission on (i) disallowance and (ii) the £60 million financial correction levied on the Department for Agriculture and Rural Development Northern Ireland. 
Mr Paice: The European Commission has confirmed financial corrections in respect of the Department for Agriculture and Rural Development (DARD) Northern Ireland of £13,123,106.40 and €18,600,258.71. These sums mostly relate to payments made by DARD and funded by the Commission during EU financial years 2005-07 (i.e. 16 October 2004 to 15 October 2007) that concerned the Extensification Premium Scheme (Scheme Year 2004) and the Single Payment Scheme (Scheme Years 2005 and 2006). The UK formally recorded its continued concerns with the Commission that these financial corrections are wholly disproportionate to any actual risk to the Fund and that the Northern Ireland Authorities are therefore actively considering referring the case to the European Court of Justice. Discussions with the Commission on proposed financial corrections covering later financial years remain ongoing.
Hilary Benn: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs for how many homes the Environment Agency plans to improve flood protection in 2010-11. 
Richard Benyon: In 2010-11, the Environment Agency plans to improve flood protection for 79,000 households in England.
Zac Goldsmith: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what steps she plans to take to eradicate the oak processionary moth. 
Mr Paice: The Forestry Commission has put in place an emergency programme to deal with this pest and is working with officials from the affected London boroughs, the Food and Environment Research Agency, the Health Protection Agency and others to try to prevent its spread and to eradicate it.
A team of dedicated surveyors carries out inspections of sites where oak trees are present. Where the pest is found, owners are required either to have affected trees sprayed with insecticide to kill off the moth's larvae, or to have nests removed and destroyed before a new generation of adults emerges to breed.
The moth is thought to have been introduced into the area on infected oak trees used for landscaping work. Temporary import restrictions have therefore been put in place and a request has been made to have the pest listed in the EU plant health directive so that these restrictions may be made permanent.
Julian Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (1) on what dates she has met the chief executive of the Rural Payments Agency since her appointment; and what issues were discussed at each such meeting; 
(2) on what date she expects completion of the work on the Rural Payments Agency's computer system; and what her most recent estimate is of the costs of completing such work; 
(3) what discussions she has had with the chief executive of the Rural Payments Agency on the completion of single payment (a) part-payments for 2008 and (b) part and full payments for 2009; what steps the Agency is taking to ensure such payments are made promptly; and if she will make a statement. 
Mr Paice: An independent review of the Rural Payments Agency, commissioned by DEFRA, concluded recently. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State and I are studying the recommendations, which cover IT as well as a range of other issues, and will publish them shortly along with the Government's response to the review. In the meantime, the agency is taking all steps possible to make either full or part payments in respect of outstanding single payment scheme claims. I intend to meet the RPA to discuss the handling of payments in considerable detail.
Chris Evans: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what recent assessment she has made of the performance of the Rural Payments Agency. 
Mr Paice: An independent Review of the Rural Payments Agency, commissioned by DEFRA, concluded recently. The Government will publish the recommendations of the Review and our response to it shortly.
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what medical experts have been asked to give evidence in the mushroom
composting investigation into Tunneltech initiated by her Department through the Health Protection Agency and the local primary care trust. 
Mr Paice: The following medical experts were involved in the preparation of the report referred to in the oral question from the hon. Member on 24 June 2010, Official Report, column 415, the Director of Public Health for Bassetlaw and Nottinghamshire County Primary Care Trust; consultants in public health at the Primary Care Trust; consultants in health protection at the Health Protection Agency; the Health Protection Agency's Composting Working Group; and at least three general practitioner practices in the area around the Tunneltech plant.
Mr Alan Campbell: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what plans she has for the future funding of (a) the ACPO Vehicle Crime Intelligence Service and (b) the National Wildlife Crime Unit. 
James Brokenshire: As the Chancellor of the Exchequer announced in his emergency Budget on 22 June, the Government are currently conducting a spending review. The review, to be published on 20 October, will set final departmental settlements. I will make decisions about future funding of individual areas of Home Office business in light of the outcome of the spending review.
John Mann: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department in respect of cases where proceedings have been completed, which five retailers were prosecuted the most times for offences involving the illegal sale of alcohol in 2009; and how many prosecutions were brought against each. 
James Brokenshire: Statistics for 2009 are planned for publication in October 2010.
John Mann: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many convictions there were for the offence of selling alcohol to juveniles in 2009; and how many of those convicted had their alcohol licence revoked. 
James Brokenshire: Statistics for 2009 are planned for publication in October 2010.
Catherine McKinnell: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if she will postpone decisions on applications for asylum in all cases where the applicants were receiving legal aid and assistance from Refugee and Migrant Justice until arrangements have been made for alternative legal aid and assistance to be provided to them; and if she will make a statement. 
Damian Green: While the UK Border Agency will take every care to ensure that former Refugee and Migrant Justice clients are not unreasonably affected and will treat individual cases sensitively, we are unable to give a blanket assurance that no adverse immigration decisions will be taken on their former clients until a new legal representative has been appointed.
Mary Creagh: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department with reference to the answer to the hon. Member for Preseli Pembrokeshire of 24 March 2010, Official Report, columns 351-52W, on the UK Border Agency's War Crimes Unit, how many people were refused citizenship, denied leave to enter/remain, or excluded from the Refugee convention in each year since 2004. 
Damian Green: The UKBA does not collate statistics on the outcomes of all recommendations made by its specialist research team. Decisions to exclude someone from refugee protection under article 1F (a) of the Refugee Convention have been recorded separately since October 2007. As at the end of May 2010, UKBA has recorded that 31 decisions to exclude have been implemented. This figure is not provided under National Statistics protocols. It is therefore provisional and subject to change.
Sir Menzies Campbell: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department on how many occasions visa bans have been used to prevent people from each country of origin considered to be involved in corruption from travelling to the UK in each of the last five years. 
Damian Green: In the last five years, a total of seven people have been excluded from the UK by the Secretary of State because of involvement in corruption (six in 2007 and one in 2008). Six of the individuals were Kenyan and one was Zimbabwean. Any application for entry clearance or leave to enter from a person who has been excluded from the UK by the Secretary of State will be refused under Paragraph 320(6) of the Immigration Rules.
This information is based on management information and as such has not been quality assured. It is provisional and subject to change.
Mr Hanson: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what her most recent estimate is of the annual cost to the public purse of crime. 
The information required to answer this question is not collected routinely. The latest Home Office estimates of the costs of crime were published in Home Office Online Report 30/05. They relate to crimes committed against individuals and households in the year 2003-04, and are broken down into a range of cost categories, some of which cover public sector expenditure or the use of public sector resources. Table 4.1 of Home Office Online Report 30/05 indicates that crime committed
against individuals and households in 2003-04 was estimated to have resulted in criminal justice system costs of £7,096 million and health service costs of £2,356 million. It was also estimated to have cost £4,253 million in lost output due to time off work, and some of this is likely to have been borne by the public sector. Financial transfers are not included in these estimates, so they do not include compensation paid to victims of crime through the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme. Costs to the public purse due to crime committed against businesses and the public sector itself, as well as a result of anti-social behaviour, are also not included in these estimates.
Philip Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how much her Department has spent (a) in total and (b) on staff costs on activities to promote equality and diversity in each of the last three years for which figures are available; and how many people her Department employs for that purpose. 
Lynne Featherstone: The Department has statutory responsibilities set out in equality legislation, both as an employer and provider of services.
In discharging these responsibilities, the Home Department under the last Government spent the following:
2007-08: £1,725,000, of which £837,000 were staff costs.
2008-09: £1,683,000, of which £1,071,000 were staff costs.
2009-10: £1,518,000, of which £1,026,000 were staff costs.
The number of people employed specifically on equality and diversity is 20.
David Morris: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many records on the national DNA database she expects to be destroyed in the next 12 months. 
James Brokenshire: At present, a DNA profile will be retained indefinitely unless the relevant Chief Officer of Police as data owner decides to authorise its deletion from the National DNA Database.
The Government are committed to a policy on retention of DNA profiles that provides the protections of the Scottish model, under which the profiles from those arrested but not convicted are only retained in serious cases and for a limited period. We will bring forward shortly detailed proposals for legislative change to give effect to our policy.
Laura Sandys: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what research her Department has (a) commissioned and (b) evaluated on a link between competence in the English language and the likelihood of overstaying following the issue of a student visa. 
The Government will be reviewing the non-economic immigration routes with a view to bringing forward proposals in due course, and this will
include detailed consideration of the student routes. The UK Border Agency has analysed information on levels of abuse based on nationality, and on students not enrolling on courses or discontinuing study as part of tier four review undertaken earlier this year. As tier four of the points-based system was only launched just over a year ago, on 31 March 2009, many of the visas issued under the new student route have not yet expired and consequently no specific research has yet been commissioned or evaluated on the links between overstaying and competence in the English language.
I have asked for a thorough evaluation of the student system to be undertaken in the coming months. The aim of that work will be to ensure that the right balance is struck between providing a user-friendly route for bona fide students and education providers and keeping out those who would seek to abuse the student system.
Mr Clappison: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) how many work permits have been issued to non-EU workers in each occupation in each year since 1997; 
(2) how many work permit intracompany transfers were granted in respect of workers of each (a) nationality and (b) occupation for each year since 1997; 
(3) how many intracompany transfer work permits were granted to each of the three companies with the largest number of such grants in the last year for which figures are available. 
Damian Green: The number of work permit intra company transfers granted to each of the three companies with the largest number of grants in 2008, which is the last year for which figures are available, are: 4,470; 3,065; and 2,385. The other information requested is detailed in Annexes A, B, and C:
Annex A: Number of work permits issued to non-EU workers in each occupation in each year since 1997.
Annex B: Number of work permit intra company transfers granted by nationality in each year since 1997.
Annex C: Number of work permit intra company transfers granted by occupation in each year since 1997.
These Annexes have been placed in the Libraries of the House.
Tony Lloyd: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the average time taken to process applications for (a) post-study work visas, (b) indefinite leave to remain based on long-term residency, (c) certificate of approval for marriage and (d) leave to remain was in the latest period for which figures are available. 
Damian Green: The average processing times are as follows:
Financial year 2009-10: 37 calendar days
April 2010 to May 2010: 23 calendar days
2. Indefinite leave to remain based on long-term residency :
Financial year 2009-10: 465 calendar days
April 2010 to May 2010: 240 calendar days
Financial Year 2009-10: 86 calendar days
April 2010 to May 2010: 99 calendar days
|LTR cases by category in calendar days|
|Financial year 2009-10||April 2010 to May 2010|
1. The figures quoted are not provided under National Statistics protocols and have been derived from local management information and are therefore provisional and subject to change.
2. All data extracts measure applications despatched between two dates.
3. Average Processing Time calculated from application raised date and date despatched.
4. Post-study work visas defined by the following case types: Tier one (T1) Highly Skilled (HS)-UK Graduate Worker (Post Study)-Extension, T1 HS-Post Study-International (Int.), T1 HS-(Revised) Post Study-Int.
5. Indefinite leave to remain (based on long-term residency) defined by the following two case types: Long Residency (10 Year)-ILR, Long Residency (14 Year)-ILR.
6. Certificate of Approval defined by the following case types: Certificate of Approval (Civil Partnership), Certificate of Approval (Marriage).
David Morris: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps her Department is taking to ensure that British passports are not used by foreign intelligence services. 
Damian Green: The UK passport is one of the most secure documents of its kind, fully meeting rigorous international standards. This security is delivered through a combination of physical and electronic security features. Since 2006 individuals have been biometrically linked to their passports through their photograph contained in an electronic chip embedded in the document. The chip cannot be altered without Border Control officers becoming aware that the passport has been tampered with. UK passports also have a range of physical security measures designed to prevent forgery and tampering. A new design of UK passport will be issued from 5 October 2010. It will contain new security printing features to combat fraud.
The Identity and Passport Service also has a range of measures in place to detect and deter passport fraud which led to the IPS preventing around 17,000 fraudulent applications in the last two years. These include:
checking biographical information to ensure that the identity claimed on the application form is real, living, and can be linked to the customer through checks against a range of public and private sector databases;
the development of facial recognition systems to check applicant images against a database of images of suspected fraudsters;
checking applicants against increasingly sophisticated internal watch files including databases of infant deaths and passports reported lost or stolen;
strengthening its business processes for identity authentication, and training and support for passport examiners and specialist fraud units; and
interviews for all first-time adult customers.
These measures are continuously assessed and attempted frauds and forgeries analysed to ensure security is maintained and to identify opportunities for further strengthening of the passport and passport issuing processes.
Paul Goggins: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many (a) police community support officers and (b) police officers there were in each police authority area on 1 July 2010. 
Nick Herbert: Figures on numbers of police community support officers and police officers for each police force area are collected by the Home Office twice a year, covering 30 March and 30 September.
The most recently published figures relate to 30 September 2009, and were published in the Home Office statistical bulletin 'Police Service Strength England and Wales 30 September 2009'-available on-line at:
Figures for 30 March 2010 will be published on 22 July.
Paul Goggins: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) what estimate she has made of the (a) minimum and (b) average early retirement costs for a police officer whose services are no longer required; 
(2) what estimate she has made of the average early retirement cost in respect of a police officer with (a) 20, (b) 15, (c) 10 and (d) five or fewer years of service whose service is no longer required. 
Nick Herbert: No such estimates have been made. There is no provision in the police pension schemes for early retirement of a police officer whose services are no longer required. There is separate provision for the early retirement of chief officers in certain circumstances, which is detailed in Police Negotiating Board Joint Circular five of 2004 as amended by Circular three of 2010.
Daniel Kawczynski: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if she will discuss with the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs the matter of assistance for the Metropolitan police to gain access to Libya for the purposes of its investigation into the murder of PC Yvonne Fletcher. 
Nick Herbert: The murder of WPC Fletcher was a terrible crime and her family deserve to know the truth. The investigation into her murder is continuing and remains an operational matter for the police. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office is in regular contact with the Metropolitan Police Service and continues to press the Libyan Government to allow them to return. On 31 May, the Foreign Secretary raised the WPC Fletcher case with the Libyan Foreign Minister, Musa Kusa.
Huw Irranca-Davies: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will publish (a) the slides in his Department's presentation on its assumptions of the effects of the measures in the 2010 Budget and (b) the analysis supporting the presentation. 
Mr Gauke: The Government published the impact of measures in the 2010 Budget in the Budget document
and the Office for Budget Responsibility has published the Budget forecast and supporting assumptions.
Andrew George: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) what economic modelling his Department undertook to determine the proposed level at which (a) capital gains tax, (b) entrepreneurs' relief and (c) the annual exempt amount would be set; 
(2) what (a) research and (b) impact assessments he undertook in deciding on his proposal for capital gains tax in the June 2010 Budget; 
(3) what estimate his Department has made of the revenue which would accrue to the Exchequer from capital gains tax if the income tax rate for those with an income above the higher rate threshold were (a) 18, (b) 19, (c) 20, (d) 25, (e) 30, (f) 35 and (g) 40 per cent. 
Mr Gauke: The policy costings document published alongside the 2010 Emergency Budget Book sets out the methodology for arriving at such estimates and the likely effects on revenue:
Impact assessments are not required for changes which only impact on individuals.
Glenda Jackson: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many people are in receipt of child benefit in (a) Hampstead and Kilburn constituency and (b) the London borough of (i) Camden and (ii) Brent. 
Mr Gauke: The latest information on the number of families receiving child benefit, by each parliamentary constituency, local authority and region is available in the HMRC snapshot publication "Child Benefit Statistics Geographical Analysis. August 2009". This can be found at:
Rushanara Ali: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many children in (a) Bethnal Green and Bow and (b) Tower Hamlets have received payments from the Child Trust Fund in each year since its inception. 
Mr Hoban: Each Child Trust Fund account that is opened currently receives a payment of £250 from the Government with an additional payment of £250 being made in the case of children in lower income families. Statistics showing the level of Child Trust Fund opening in each parliamentary constituency and local authority area can be viewed on HM Revenue and Customs' website at:
Frank Dobson: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will take steps to facilitate the use of EU funds to support credit unions in England. 
Mr Hoban [holding answer 5 July 2010]: There are no general EU funds to support credit unions, although some regions of the UK are eligible for Structural Fund money and may make available part of such funds to credit unions. The Coalition Government has pledged to bring forward detailed proposals to foster diversity, promote mutuals and create a more competitive banking industry.
Mr Khalid Mahmood: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer pursuant to the answer to the hon. Member for West Bromwich East of 10 June 2010, Official Report, column 202W, on departmental mobile phones, what the (a) purchase cost of the handset, (b) network provider, (c) type of tariff and (d) name of the supplier was of each BlackBerry issued to Ministers in his Department. 
Justine Greening [holding answer 24 June 2010]: Mobile phones and Blackberry devices issued for official use are provided under a pan-government framework. Blackberry handset costs are fixed at £125 when supplied as an upgrade or £235 for a new provision. According to central records all Treasury ministers were provided with new handsets as an upgrade on existing mobile accounts. All departmental mobile phone devices are provided by Vodafone and are supplied under the Teamwork/Teamwork and Blackberry tariff. The costs provided are excluding VAT.
Treasury Blackberrys are configured in line with government security standards to enable them to be used for secure email communication.
Miss McIntosh: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he plans to implement in full the recommendations of the Parliamentary Ombudsman on Equitable Life, with particular reference to the recommendations on the amount of compensation. 
Mr Hoban: We have committed to implement the Parliamentary and Health Ombudsman's recommendation to make fair and transparent payments to Equitable Life policyholders, through an independent payment scheme, for their relative loss as a consequence of regulatory failure.
The Parliamentary Ombudsman did not make any recommendations on the amount of compensation, but noted that:
"it would be appropriate to consider the potential impact on the public purse"
Chris Heaton-Harris: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what the net contribution has been of the UK to the EU for (a) 2006, (b) 2007 and (c) 2008; and what he expects that contribution to be in (i) 2009, (ii) 2010 and (iii) 2011. 
Justine Greening: Table 2.9 of the supplementary material to the emergency Budget 2010, available at
provides the latest projections for the UK's net contribution to the EU budget for the fiscal years 2008-09 (outturn) to 2015-16 (forecasts). The following table contains historical figures not covered in table 2.9.
1. The "Net contribution to EU Budget" is the GNI, VAT and TOR contributions (gross contribution) less abatement less receipts.
2. The "Net payments to EU institutions" is equivalent to the net contribution to EU budget less that part of the UK's contribution to the EC budget that is attributed to the external aid programme (DFID/FCO DEL).
The Government are concerned about the UK's increasing contributions to the EU budget. The EU budget for the period 2007-13 was agreed by the previous Government in 2005, meaning the UK's contributions cannot easily be reduced. But at a time of painful fiscal consolidation across many EU member states, it is only fair that the EU budget play its part. As the Chancellor told a recent meeting of EU Finance Ministers, a freeze in EU spending should be considered. And looking ahead to the negotiation of the EU budget for the period 2014-20, the Government will strongly defend the UK's national interests, and ensure the EU budget is focused on those areas where the EU adds value.
Chris Heaton-Harris: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) on how many occasions the Government has been fined by the European Commission since the rules pertaining to fining states for non-implementation of EU regulations were instituted; and what (a) initial financial correction was set and (b) end financial correction was paid after negotiations and appeal in each case; 
(2) on how many occasions the Government has been found in persistent breach of obligations under EU regulations since 2001; what fines were levied in each case; and if he will make a statement. 
Justine Greening: The United Kingdom has never incurred a financial penalty under article 260 of the treaty on the functioning of the European Union (or under the former article 228 (ex article 171) of the treaty establishing the European Community).
Jon Trickett: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many people in Hemsworth constituency have received the health in pregnancy grant since its introduction. 
Heidi Alexander: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many health in pregnancy grants were made in Lewisham East constituency in 2009-10. 
Mr Gauke: This information is available only at disproportionate cost.
Mr Laws: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what estimate he has made of gross public expenditure in 2008-09 prices (a) spent in each year since 1990-91 and (b) planned in each year to 2015-16; and if he will make a statement. 
Danny Alexander: Total Managed Expenditure (TME) in 2008-09 prices since 1990-91 was as follows:-
|Real TME (2008-09 prices) £billion|
The 2009-10 figure is the estimated outturn.
TME in 2008-09 prices planned to 2015-16 is as follows:
Huw Irranca-Davies: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what assessment he has made of the effect of the proposals in Budget 2010 on economic growth in (a) Wales and (b) Bridgend County borough council area in each of the next five years. 
Danny Alexander: The June 2010 Budget will promote economic growth in all countries and regions of the UK including Wales and Bridgend.
Lisa Nandy: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether his policy of transparency on public spending applies to the review of capital expenditure approvals since 1 January 2010; and which projects are under review in each parliamentary constituency. 
Danny Alexander: On 17 June I announced the outcome of a review of 217 projects that had been submitted to the Treasury for re-approval. These projects included both capital and resource expenditure. 12 projects were cancelled as they did not demonstrate value for money, were unaffordable or did not reflect the Government's priorities, and a further 12 projects were suspended as more detailed work is needed as part of the spending review process. As set out in the following lists, some of these decisions will affect specific constituencies while others relate to programmes that apply nationally:
|1. List of projects cancelled|
|2. List of projects suspended|
Successor Deterrent Extension to Concept Phase Long Lead Items(3)
Search and Rescue Helicopters-joint procurement between DFT and MOD
Cambridge North West, South and South East; Huntingdon; Bedfordshire North East
|(1) Government funding for this programme has been withdrawn. If non-government funding is identified approval to proceed could be given.|
(2) Includes efficiency savings from tighter management of under performing Future Jobs Fund providers.
(3) Successor Deterrent Extension to Concept Phase Long Lead Items will be reviewed as part of the broader Trident value for money review, which will report in the coming weeks. Any necessary long lead items would subsequently be procured from various suppliers in the US and UK.
I also laid in the Libraries of both Houses of Parliament a full list of projects that were not cancelled or suspended as part of this exercise:
For these projects the Treasury does not hold a complete and detailed list by constituency.
John McDonnell: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what savings he estimates will be made as a result of the two-year public sector pay freeze in each year from 2010-11 to 2014-15. 
Danny Alexander: This policy will save £3.3 billion a year by 2014-15. The freeze will also apply in health workforces, but savings will be recycled within the NHS.
Dr Whitehead: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer with reference to the 2010 Budget, what estimate he has made of the size of the regional growth fund to fund regional capital projects in (a) 2011-12 and (b) 2012-13. 
Danny Alexander: The Deputy Prime Minister announced on 29 June 2010 that the regional growth fund for 2011-12 and 2012-13 would total £1 billion.
A White Paper setting out further details will published in the autumn.
Richard Fuller: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what recent steps HM Revenue and Customs has taken to improve levels of accuracy in the processing of tax codes. 
Mr Gauke: Following the issue of tax codes for 2010-11 in January 2010 HMRC identified several situations where, due to a mismatch between data held on HMRC's systems, and data supplied by employers and pensions providers individuals may have received an incorrect coding for 2010-11.
Before the start of the new tax year, HMRC worked to identify and review cases where incorrect coding notices could have been issued. They corrected where necessary the underlying records through a mix of automated repairs and clerical reviews. They ensured that no codes were issued to employers or pension providers until they had conducted these reviews in order to prevent incorrect codes leading to incorrect tax deductions.
HMRC completed reviewing the bulk of the cases in time for the start of 2010-11. Where no new code was issued employers continued to operate the code that
applied in the old year which is a normal part of the PAYE process. HMRC continues to correct codes, where necessary, as part of its day to day work.
HMRC has provided advice on its website about these issues and continues to be in regular contact with employers, pension providers and their representative bodies to ensure they are kept properly informed.
Overall the introduction of the national insurance and pay as you earn service computer system (NPS) and work HMRC has conducted this year will ensure more accurate tax coding than ever before.
Frank Dobson: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what the take-up rate was in the Savings Gateway pilots. 
Mr Hoban: Two pilots of the Saving Gateway were conducted between 2002 and 2007. 1,500 accounts were opened in the first pilot, and 22,000 in the second. The reports on both pilots which detail their sampling approaches are available via the HM Treasury website archive.
The emergency Budget announced that the Saving Gateway will not be introduced in July 2010, given the need to reduce the UK's budget deficit.
David Morris: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he plans to bring forward proposals to offer tax reductions to house builders who integrate renewable energy into new developments. 
Justine Greening: The feed-in tariff (FIT) scheme exists to incentivise investment in small-scale renewable energy, including renewable generation installed by developers. The Chancellor takes decisions regarding tax policy as part of the usual Budget process.
Heidi Alexander: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many households in receipt of tax credits have an annual income of over £30,000 in Lewisham East constituency; 
Gloria De Piero: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many households in receipt of tax credits have an income of over £30,000 in (a) Ashfield, (b) Argyll and Bute and (c) Na h-Eileanan an Iar constituency; 
Glenda Jackson: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) how many households in Hampstead and Kilburn constituency with an annual income over £30,000 are in receipt of tax credits; 
(2) how many households in the London borough of (a) Camden and (b) Brent in receipt of tax credits have an annual income over £30,000. 
Mr Gauke: Analysis of the number of households with incomes over £30,000 in the a fore mentioned constituencies is shown in Table 1 as follow. This information is based on provisional information of families receiving tax credits as at April 2010.
|Constituency/London borough||Number of households with Income over £30,000|
Further details about the snapshot data used for this analysis can be found in the HMRC snapshot publication "Child and Working Tax Credits. Geographical Analysis, April 2010". This is available at:
Huw Irranca-Davies: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will publish the minutes of each meeting in his Department at which his proposed bank levy was discussed. 
Mr Hoban: Treasury Ministers and officials have discussions with a wide variety of organisations in the public and private sectors as part of the process of policy development and delivery. As was the case with previous Administrations, it is not the Government's practice to provide details of all such discussions.
Huw Irranca-Davies: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what factors he took into account in determining the level of his proposed bank levy. 
Mr Hoban: The proposed rate reflects the risks posed by the banking sector to the financial system and wider economy, while taking account of current economic circumstances and the UK's competitive position.
Andrew George: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what assessment he has made of the likely effects of the proposed increase in the standard rate of value added tax on (a) charities, (b) road fuel prices, (c) construction work for which value added tax is payable, (d) the retail industry, (e) low income pensioner households and (f) the prospects for the economic situation. 
Mr Gauke: The Budget's VAT rate increase was driven by the need to address the deficit, which will benefit everyone. The effects of the rate change are set out in Budget 2010:
The associated impact assessment, which describes the compliance costs for business, was published alongside the Budget:
The impact of the VAT increase depends on expenditure, which varies considerably even among households of similar composition. It also needs to be considered in
the context of the Budget as a whole. Annex A provides an analysis of the distributional impact of the Budget:
In particular, paragraph C.58 sets out the Office for Budget Responsibility's (OBR) views on the incidence of VAT. Paragraph C.54 and Table C8 describe the OBR's view of the effect on GDP over time of Budget measures, including VAT. G.39 and C.64 describe the OBR's projections of tax receipts, including VAT.
Dr Whiteford: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what the cost will be in each year from 2010-11 onwards for which information is available to (a) each NHS board and (b) each local authority of the decision to increase the rate of value added tax. 
Mr Gauke: This information is not available.
Public bodies are funded inclusive of tax costs. There are schemes that allow local authorities to recover VAT in respect of their non business activities and NHS Trusts to recover VAT in respect of certain contracted out services. But the amount of VAT that such bodies do not recover is not routinely recorded.
Yvonne Fovargue: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many households in Makerfield constituency in receipt of tax credits have an income of over £30,000. 
Kate Green: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many households in receipt of tax credits in Stretford and Urmston constituency have an income of over £30,000. 
Barbara Keeley: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many households in receipt of tax credits have an income of over £30,000 in Worsley and Eccles South constituency. 
Ann McKechin: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many households in receipt of tax credits in (a) Glasgow North and (b) Ealing Central and Acton constituency have an income of over £30,000. 
Fiona Mactaggart: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many households in receipt of tax credits in (a) Slough, (b) Salisbury and (c) Scarborough and Whitby constituency have an income of over £30,000. 
Bridget Phillipson: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many households in receipt of tax credits have an income of over £30,000 in Houghton and Sunderland South constituency. 
Diana R. Johnson: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many households in Kingston upon Hull North constituency in receipt of tax credits have an annual income over £30,000. 
Mr Gauke: The number of households receiving tax credits with an income over £30,000 in the aforementioned constituencies are shown in Table 1 as follows:
|Constituency||Number of households with income over £30,000|
These estimates are based on provisional information on families receiving tax credits as at April 2010. Further details about this data can be found in the HMRC snapshot publication "Child and Working Tax Credits. Geographical Analysis, April 2010". This is available at:
Philip Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice if he will extend the virtual courts pilot to Bradford magistrates court. 
Mr Djanogly: There are no plans at present to extend the virtual courts pilot to Bradford magistrates court.
Virtual courts have been piloted in London, at Camberwell Green magistrates court and in Kent, at Medway magistrates court. The virtual court focussed on testing whether first hearings in the magistrates courts could be undertaken through the use of technology by connecting police stations to magistrates courts via video link. The pilot is currently being independently evaluated.
Mr Bain: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice which Ministers in his Department have used an allocated ministerial car to travel between his Department and the House of Commons on each day since 21 May 2010. 
Mr Blunt: The Secretary of State, the Minister of State for Justice and the two Parliamentary Under-Secretaries of State at the Ministry of Justice currently have use of an allocated ministerial car during the week. This may include journeys between the Department and the Palace of Westminster.
The Home Office provides the arrangements in relation to the Minister of State for Policing and Criminal Justice, who also has ministerial responsibilities at the Ministry of Justice.
The new Ministerial Code, published on 21 May 2010, contains changes that affect ministerial entitlement to travel by Government car. It states that
"the number of Ministers with allocated cars and drivers will be kept to a minimum, taking into account security and other relevant considerations. Other Ministers will be entitled to use cars from the Government Car Service Pool as needed."
The Department for Transport and its Government Car and Despatch Agency are working with Departments to effect the transition to the new arrangements.
The Ministerial Code is available on the Cabinet Office website.
Stella Creasy: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many claims for asylum for which legal aid has been granted and for whom the charity Refugee Migrant Justice has been retained as legal representation have been made but not yet completed. 
Mr Djanogly: The Legal Services Commission is working with the administrators of RMJ to establish how many active files they have but this information is not currently available. I will write to the hon. Member when the number is obtained.
Dr Thérèse Coffey: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what estimate he has made of prison capacity in each of the next three years. 
Mr Blunt: The Government believe that we need enough prison places for those whom the courts judge should receive a custodial sentence. The Core Capacity programme will increase capacity to 94,000 places by the end of 2012.
We are carrying out a full review of rehabilitation and sentencing and will explore ways of increasing private and voluntary sector involvement in the justice system. We are working on the details underlying those objectives, including economic analysis to look at various options.
Long-term decisions on prison capacity programmes will be taken in the light of these initiatives.
Ian Lucas: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many prisoners who had served a sentence of six months or less re-offended within 12 months of discharge in (a) 2006, (b) 2007 and (c) 2008. 
Mr Blunt: The available data on reoffending following a custodial sentence of six months or less is provided the following table-please note that this breakdown is based on custodial sentences awarded by the court.
|Number and proportion of adult offenders reoffending after release from custody in the first quarter of 2006, 2007 and 2008 having been awarded a sentence of six months or less|
|Number of offenders discharged from sentences of six months or less (January to March)||Number of offenders reoffending within 12 months||Percentage of offenders reoffending within 12 months|
Further information on adult reoffending is available at:
Mr Burrowes: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many prison service staff are working in (a) frontline delivery and (b) elsewhere in each establishment on the prison estate in England and Wales. 
Mr Blunt: All staff working within Prison Service establishments deliver frontline services. Information on the number of directly employed staff within each establishment on 31 March 2010 is provided in the following table.
|Full - time equivalent staff in post by establishment|
|Establishment||FTE as at 31 March 2010|
Dr Thérèse Coffey: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice (1) how many non-UK nationals from (a) EU member states and (b) non-EU member states are detained in prison (i) on remand and (ii) serving sentences; 
(2) how many non-UK nationals of each country of citizenship are in prison. 
Mr Blunt: From the most recent available data, March 2010, there are 880 non-UK nationals from EU member states in prison on remand and a further 2,400 serving sentences. There were 1,500 non-EU nationals in prison on remand and a further 5,400 serving sentences.
These figures have been rounded-numbers from 1,000 to 99,999 are rounded to the nearest 100 and numbers from 10 to 999 are rounded to the nearest 10.
The number of foreign national prisoners held in all prison establishments in England and Wales by nationality is published quarterly in the population in custody bulletin, found under the following link:
The following tables show the number of (a) non UK and (b) non EU nationals of each country in all prison establishments in England and Wales, from the most recent available data at the end of March 2010.
These figures have been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.
|Table 1: Population in prison by nationality and sex, England and Wales - 31 March 2010|
|(1) Excluding UK nationals|
Data Sources and Quality
These figures have been drawn from administrative IT systems. Care is taken when processing and analysing the returns, but the detail collected is subject to the inaccuracies inherent in any large scale recording system, and so although shown to the last individual, the figure may not be accurate to that level.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|